This invention relates generally to a method of determining fuel consumption and, more particularly, to an energy test method for measuring and reducing real world fuel consumption.
While the discussion below is directed to heavy duty vehicles, such as “tractors” and/or “tractor-trailers”, it should be appreciated that the method of the current invention applies generally to the determination of and the reduction of real world fuel consumption.
The transportation industry is vital to small and large businesses alike which need to deliver a product to a store, warehouse facility, and/or to a consumer directly. One of the preferred ways to transport products is the use of heavy duty vehicles like those used in the trucking industry. One of, if not, the biggest costs for a trucking company is fuel. For example, the purchase price of a new “tractor” in the trucking industry is approximately $125,000. During the tractor's lifetime it may consume over $400,000 in fuel—over three times the purchase price of the vehicle. In order to maximize profitability and meet government mandates on fuel consumption, it is essential for these companies to implement fuel savings strategies.
In the United States, diesel fuel prices remained fairly flat between 1994 and 2002 with a minimum fuel price of $0.95/gallon in 1999; however, in 2002, the price of diesel fuel began to increase with a high fuel price of $4.76/gallon in 2008. Such rises in fuel price directly impact not only the profits of a trucking company but also the cost of goods to a consumer. While fuel prices have declined to about $2.40/gallon today from the high in 2008, volatility still prevails.
In addition to fuel prices, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set new fuel standards for combination tractors beginning in 2021. The standards are increased incrementally through 2024 with full adoption by 2027 and require twenty-five percent lower CO2 emissions and fuel consumption by 2027. The EPA recognizes that the standards will not be met by simply improving engine efficiency and, as a result, have made it clear that the twenty-five percent reduction maybe accomplished by the implementation of several strategies such as aerodynamics, low rolling resistance tires, weight reduction, extended idle reduction technologies, automatic tire inflation, increased engine fuel efficiency, and other suitable strategies.
Unfortunately, the trucking industry has struggled to reliably reduce fuel consumption because it has lacked a reliable means for measuring fuel savings. Typically, fuel economy test results are specific to the conditions the test is performed in, which makes it difficult to determine the true fuel savings of a fuel savings strategy. Since the test conditions are almost always different to a trucking company's real-world operating conditions, it is difficult to determine how much fuel and money will be saved in the conditions (such as temperature, wind, altitude, and vehicle speed) their vehicles operate in.
Further, test conditions inherently vary from one test to another, which affects the test results. Thus, when testing multiple fuel saving strategies (i.e. in multiple tests) it is difficult to quantify the actual difference in fuel savings between the various strategies, thereby making it difficult to choose the appropriate fuel saving strategy. The trucking industry as a whole relies on published test results to compare various fuel saving strategies, but since the test results are dependent on the conditions tested in, an “apples to apples” test is impossible.
As a result, determining which fuel savings strategy provides the best fuel savings result is unpredictable and results in added financial risk, causing the trucking industry to become hesitant to invest in and/or adopt fuel saving strategies since they are unsure of the actual fuel savings from one strategy to the next. In fact, the EPA and North American Council for Freight Efficiency (NACFE) have stated that the lack of credible information on fuel efficiency is one of the major barriers to improving the trucking industry due to confusion in regards to fuel economy improvements and an inability to predict fuel savings and financial return-on-investment. Thus, trucking companies continue to waste fuel and money and pollute unnecessarily.
To make reliable decisions on fuel saving strategies, trucking companies must quantify the fuel savings they will experience in their fleet's real-world operations since that determines how much money the strategy being considered will actually save their company. The common practice is to conduct a long-term test whereby they employ the fuel savings strategy being considered on one or more vehicles and track its fuel economy over several months (often up to 12 months). Unfortunately, there are many difficulties with this method that impede fuel savings, such as poor test accuracy caused by continuously changing variables, maintenance and breakdown issues that affect fuel economy and skew results, and driver behavior which also skews results. These tests take a significant amount of time and manpower to conduct since a person must continuously track the fuel economy, maintenance, and other variables of the vehicle where the strategy is being tested. Due to the length of time required and the workload of long-term testing, only a small number of fuel saving strategies can be evaluated at one time in a company, thereby slowing progress and adoption. Overall, the method of measuring real-world fuel savings by employing the strategy in a fleet is not highly effective. Most attempts provide inconclusive results. Due to the lack of precision, current long term testing cannot detect fuel savings or differentiate between similar strategies.
Accordingly, there is a need for an improved method of testing fuel saving strategies to determine which fuel saving strategies are best suited for a particular fleet and to bring the trucking industry into compliance with the EPA's new standards.